[ezero1 device (CGON)]

I did do before and after tests as per cgon's fitting instructions. 

The merc had 120k miles on it btw. We Did an MOT on it 2 days ago and emissions read 1.5 ppm. Had it in today and after getting it really hot, emissions were 1.446ppm. After fitting and letting it run for a short time the emissions result was 0.978ppm. Not as good as cgon claim but I really should have given it a hard, long road test first I think. Also they claim there should be a further 10% reduction after using the car for a while. 

Unfortionatly this customer only does about 2k miles a year (don't know why he bothered really) so I'm not likely to get back to you all with any fuel savings. 

[ezero1 device (CGON)]

On 10/23/2017 at 18:38, andythechief said:

Hi- newbie here. Interested in this topic. Tried to get comments on CGON elsewhere but you all seem a lot more energetic! I'm well aware of the HHO people and free energy ideas; it is what it is and probably isn't.

 

I've read the ASA advert ruling, and no I don't work for CGON or indeed anyone in the automotive or government or any such related business to this topic. I happen to work for a company that makes and sells rain water harvesting systems and my main area of research is polymer honeycomb structures.

 

Why am I interested in CGON? Because I am an engineer I guess. And because my family all has VAG cars that we maintain ourselves, and one is even a diesel Skoda Yeti!

 

The inventor behind CGON, this Brian Sheard fella who some here alledge is attempting to sell snakeoil, remapped my A5 3.0 TDi several years ago. He's a real bloke making his living like the rest of us. I maintain my car myself and it has been trouble free since his remap at 36K miles. The car has now done 165K miles and my clutch and gearbox remain intact. So too my swirl flap mechanisam. I commute about 120 miles per day from north devon to Weston-super-mare, all at motorway speeds so I guess pretty kind to the big diesel lump as driving cycles go.

 

I think it unlikely Brain is not a  performance map developer, I saw no rolling roads or such like when I visited- that and he freely told me he used Quantumn maps so my testamony isn't to suggest he knows something significant that others do not, but I have used his services and chatted to his guys at the workshop. It is a garage with facilities to work on cars, pretty simple and a bit more of a 'shed' than your polished chain garage. It seems to me he setup a remapping and DPF 'maintenance' company having come out of the RN. From this perspective, this engineer in my view is a genuine chap. I believe that he believes in his product and has put significant ( relatively speaking) money and effort into it. I don't see many early retirees from the RN inventing stuff so I respect the chap for giving it a go whether his is on to something or not.

 

So the ASA- how many engineers take a product to market without sales people? My firm has sales people, they would sell their own family if they could. Coversely as an engineer I could lose them sales everyday! So, just because the ASA do not like the sales hype, and granted the evidence may not be conclusive, it does not mean that the idea behind this device does not have any merits at all.

 

I cannot find all the technical answers I want, like many here I have noted it would seem that this device and others like it will not generate a hugely significant increase in calorific contribution to combustion to reduce the use of existing fuel such that you would notice such a saving as to easily justify it financially, and herein is perhaps their business challenge as the cost of fuel is the thing which makes the economic argument. However, despite this lacking in evidence financial argument, I do believe there are probably merits in the combustion process improvements and the potential here is the most interesting to me.

 

The 64m dollar question is; does the combustion process benefit from an introduction of this gas give a benefit such that those gases which are causing our air to be polluted are reduced by a measurable amount?

 

This is hardly a NOS system, and there is not the infrastucture to provide such an equivalent volume of explosive compressed gas if it was anyway, this is just a small gas generator which makes a type or types of hydrogen with a special attention to the liquid used to do so. I have not done a patent search, but I guess you would not be able to protect an electrolyser as there must be an awful lot of them already patented.

 

I'm personally not just interested in having a formula that proves my £500 will repay me in fuel bill savings- I am also and mainly interested in air quality and the reduction in the most harmful emmissions which are plaguing our cities and many others around the world. I am also interested because I want to keep the freedom to drive my car, vans and bikes a while slightly reducing their existing impact on the environment a little. To do this I will pay money and I think so too will a lot of other people. I like electric cars, but they create other problems which may not be anymore palatable in the long run so as yet I have not bought one.

 

I am also interested because I tinker with cars and I can see the day coming that the results of my car tinkering are going to catch up with me at an improved MOT testing station....the days of certified at point of manufacture with a CO2 sticker are numbered in my view. It will take a while, but eventually opacity and the presence of a DPF will not be sufficient for our beloved diesels. If diesel scrappage does go ahead en-mass, you can guess who is going to be paying for the government sponsored scheme...

 

I think CGON should be considered to be primarily about an improvement in harmful gaseous emmissions. The question many have including me is; is there is a discernable improvement and can this be measured and validated?

 

There appear to be some on here who know more about chemistry than I do so to them I ask this; if you were to want to collect data to assess the efficacy of this or a system like it, what parameters would you seek to measure, to what resolution and with what frequency? Do you know what sort of transducers you would use? I have read a little about Efficient Dynamics and what they are interested in, which appears to be the real world driving emmission tests.  This is not exactly the same as what CGON are interested in but clearly it is a readily available body of knowledge and capability which CGON have sought to tap into. Is it just a case of getting them to do more of the same with Efficient Dynamics or is there something missing from this approach? If so, what?

 

No I have not bought one of these, but I am very interested to do so if only as an experiment- who knows, perhaps my variable geometry turbo might last a little longer before it gets stuck. The device isn't the cost issue I am bothered about, but the reliable and robust way to analyse it's effects is because I do not have the gaseous chemistry skills to back up a data acquisition system which I could probably create without too much of a problem if there were other skills to design the sampling transducer side of things. I think there are some real experimental challenges here, because quite frankly unless you use the vehicle in exactly the same way on exactly the same road at exactly the same speed, your results are not going to be directly, quantitatively comparable. However, it all comes down to the magnitude of improvement and the accuracy with which effects can be measured. You can do so much on a engine test bed and I have a friend that used to do this for a major automotive manufacturer, but these are almost legislation driven test platforms- make the emmissions hit these targets which of course we know now means beat the test! The advent of real world emmissions tests opens a new approach and means that if emmission retrofits like CGON could be used and were effective, this would be a far more cost effective alternative to diesel scrappage and could have an immediate effect in our cities. Not everyone is as lucky to live in the prevailing atlantic breeze.

 

Is anyone with contributory skills interested to find out too?

Hi there. I'm a mechanic who has just fitted my first cgon ezero1 to a customers car, so yes, i am selling this product.

I won't say where i work, so i have nothing to gain from this. The the profit margins are not great anyway!

Fitted unit to a 2006 merc e220d and can report a 33% reduction in emissions as tested on MOT equipment. Cgon say this will improve as the car is driven but i can't comment on this or and fuel saving.

I can say, with confidence that less soot will mean less clogging of EGR valves, variable geometry turbos and DPFs which is enough for me to recommend this product.

That is all and i hope it helps. Please don't hate me for stating my personal findings and personal opinions.